This is Saunders second positive test in as many years. He was suspended the first four games last season after his initial failed test.

Shame on me, however, for being stunned at what I consider to be far too light of a punishment for someone who has now branded themselves a blatant cheater. I knew the policy. It hasn't changed since I was playing. Four games for the first positive test, eight games for the second, and a third positive test results in a one-year ban from the NFL.

Maybe it's because it is so rare that a guy is actually brazen enough to test positive twice that I hadn't really given it much thought, but now that Saunders has brought the issue to light, let me be the first to declare an eight-game ban to be far too lenient. There's no doubt in my mind a second positive test should result in a lifetime banishment from the NFL. It is both a competitive and health issue, and there's just no place for guys like that in the NFL.

The reality is, like I pointed out a few weeks ago the NFL continued to not only survive but actually thrive in years without both Tom Brady (2008) and Peyton Manning (2011). I'm pretty sure kicking Weslye Saunders out of the league isn't going to be the downfall of the league ...

Really, who doesn't think the punishment should me more severe? The NFL? The teams? The NFLPA?

Unless it is maybe a valuable player on your team I can't imagine anyone not wanting stricter guidelines for those who try to beat the system.

I even think the punishment for a first positive test should be more stringent. At least eight games and maybe a full year. I understand maybe something could happen and a drink could be spiked or a supplement tainted or whatever, and as such I am willing to allow a guy back in the league should he test positive a first time but twice? See ya later.

The reality is there is no reason for any player to test positive for anything. Ever. The team trainers and strength and conditioning staff are always available and as such a player should never ingest anything without their permission. If it is legal and they think it can help you, they will be more than happy to give it the OK and maybe even encourage it. But they won't let you take anything banned and possibly be suspended. Not on their watch. That's why the "tainted supplement" excuse is so weak these days. It's been well over 10 years, fellas. Using that as you alibi is just pathetic.

Fortunately, or, unfortunately, depending on how you look at it, the new cool excuse is now that the player tested positive for Adderall, an ADHD drug that is also a banned substance by the NFL. This excuse is even worse. Way worse.

More than a dozen players have been suspended as a result of reportedly testing positive for Adderall (the NFL does not release the substance that a player actually tested positive for), so pleading ignorance is just, well, ignorant. Plus, you are actually ALLOWED to take Adderall as long as you get a medical exemption from the league and have a doctor's prescription ahead of time. How ridiculous is it to miss four games and lose a quarter of your salary because you tested positive for something you are actually allowed to take if you follow the proper protocol?

My guess is many guys use the Adderall excuse because it doesn't have the same negative connotation as anabolic steroids. Claiming you tested positive for Adderall is like raising your hand and admitting not only are you still a cheater but you are also incredibly dumb.

To be clear, I don't think the NFL has a big performance-enhancing drug issue. Players get tested so often for these drugs that it would be very difficult to get away with it. Just ask Saunders. Or the Seahawks, for that matter, as half a dozen Seattle players have tested positive over the least three years.

While I don't think anabolic steroids and related substances are a big problem in the NFL, I think there are still too many guys testing positive and as such a bigger deterrent is needed. In fact, I think the players' union should actually be the ones pushing for this. The stricter the punishment means the less guys will be inclined to chance it and that makes the game safer for all players. You have a better chance of getting hurt if you are hit by a dude that is artificially enhanced.

Plus, you level the playing field, which is one thing the NFLPA and NFL should always be pushing for. Every player should have the same right to earn a living as the next guy without feeling like they need pharmaceuticals in order to keep up with the Joneses.

Then there's the Human Growth Hormone (HGH) component. The NFL and NFLPA agreed to testing a couple of years ago but still haven't agreed to how the testing would take place. As such, I know firsthand that many fans and members of the media just assume a large percentage of the players are taking it.

Maybe I'm naive, but that would surprise me. I played for five teams in seven years as an offensive lineman with below average strength who got injured several times. I was pretty much the ideal candidate for HGH. Yet not once, on all those teams and for all those years, did I ever hear it mentioned or have it offered. If a large percentage of NFL players are using it they are doing a darn good job of keeping it quiet.

Fortunately, there are some recent reports that the league and the union are making progress on this issue and that blood will be taken from every player during training camp as part of a group population study. Sounds like a step in the right direction and hopefully they can seal the deal in the coming weeks.

If I come across as passionate on this issue it is because I am. I never took any performance enhancing drug, but there were three or four offensive linemen I competed with for either starting jobs or roster spots over the years that I was very skeptical about. If they weren't on something, than they were blessed with insane natural strength for a human being. In every instance, I lost out to that guy I was suspicious of.

That's why I always say I wish I could get a printout someday of all of the offensive and defensive linemen that ever took a PED so that I knew exactly where I stood. Maybe I'm wrong and a lot of guys were on the stuff and I actually could have been more than a journeyman if I had leveled the playing field and taken something? Perhaps I was a better natural player than I realized?

Unfortunately, I will never get that list and that's why we must do everything possible to try to make the game as clean as possible. More severe punishment for first and especially second time PED offenders? I'm all for it. HGH blood testing? Awesome and the sooner the better.

The consequences of not doing so are too significant not to.

Ross Tucker is a 2001 Princeton graduate who played seven years in the NFL for five different teams before retiring in 2008. He wrote previously for Sports Illustrated, ESPN, and Sports USA before joining The Sporting News in July 2013.